All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Software
Why do you hate Windows XP
Master of Reality:
KDE 3.0 works just great on Red Hat 7.2 on my 200 MHZ 80MB RAM machine
slave:
How can you say that?!?! what the hell did you do to get it to run decently on 200 mhz?? It crawled so bad on my "old" 233 mhz/ 64 mb ram machine that it was a joke; it was like playing quake on a 486 and watching it move at 1 fps.
choasforages:
all i have to say is that kde 3.0 ran very nicely on my thinkpad-600 laptop /*it is now one of my three webservers*/, which by the way is a 266 machine, it has 192 megs of ram and can do many things at once, besides on a 15 inch monitor that pulls 640x480 at 8 bit color, how am i going to notice anit-aliased fonts, the one thing about kde that may be slow is the konsole, try using rxvt instead
[ June 13, 2002: Message edited by: choasforages ]
markdcc:
Really, If look and feel is that important then you need a slightly faster machine. I used to run Afterstep on my K5 100 w/ 32 megs of RAM, and it ran way faster than win95 and looked killer. You can still turn off all the animations and cool graphics in KDE just like in XP. And you can do that well below the bottom line requirements to run XP... Ok M$ says that it will run on a 233, but i'd like to see anyone do anything productive on it.
slave:
Eh, turning off all the detail in KDE didn't seem to speed it up much for me. Programs that don't use the QT framework run pretty decently on an old computer (GIMP, Xterm, etc.) but when you take the already bloated X and add something like KDE to that you incur a huge performance hit.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version